Sunday, July 13, 2008

Spot 10 things that are wrong in the picture below ...

Bought to my attention by Jack and Jill politics ... I present the latest cover of the New Yorker.




Who is surprised? To be honest, I am. Not b/c of the disgusting racist, sexist and Islamophobic messages in this "cartoon." The Obama success has brought all sorts of racist cockroaches crawling out from under rocks all over the country. I am more surprised b/c it is a "liberal" magazine, that is hiding behind the "satire" defense. This is supposed to get people thinking. Someone needs to tell them that productive satire needs to be more than throwing up all the racist drivel purported be faux news and the like. The fact that some people think this is actually OK is ... fuckin out of line! I don't care how "progressive" your magazines history is: this is not any better than the continuous racist shit spewing from fox news. In fact, I think its worse because these people are trying to pass it off like its ok. If you are a hater, at least come right out and say it.

Where to even start breaking this down? Lets play a game ... spot aspects of this image that anger the shit out of you. We should be able to go on for a looong time.

5 comments:

goc said...

Ill start:

1) Michelle Obama's machine gun ... REALLY?
2) Osama bin laden picture on the wall
3) Obama's supposed "turban"
4) THE fuckin american flag burning in the fireplace!
5) Fist bump ... sigh.

Jay said...

this shit is soo whack. crazy, 'cause i never read the new yorker. but yesterday for some reason i made my way to their site and started reading an article on obama's ascendence to the top of chi town -- and national -- politics. i didn't finish it, and didn't read enough to have an opinion on the article itself, but this picture/'analysis' is so counterproductive to any useful discussion. i can tell all it's going to say in it's attempt to be 'satircal' is that obama's not muslim, and michelle's not a gun-toting militant.

but that's not the point! why is it so scary to be muslim? that would open up an entire discussion on war, occupation, colonization and privilege that no left-leaning white liberal wants to talk about (not even to mention the fact that obama's father, and some of his nigerian relatives, might actually be/have been muslim -- funny how he's forced to claim blackness but steer as far away from islam as he can). AND michelle's comments about not being a proud american most of her life are true -- and shared by millions of folks, including myself. this type of superficial mainstream discussion is tired and hella ineffective.

Jay said...

for more, check out racialicious' "the new yorker & hipster racism':

http://www.racialicious.com/2008/07/14/the-new-yorker-and-hipster-racism/

Sky said...

also, i'd like to point out that "militant black woman" means she must wear her hair in an afro. This is the hair style that is apparently linked to "black militarism" in the (white) american imagination.

Senbei said...

wow. this is seriously f*cked. i actually read the new yorker a lot and get a lot from it. i am genuinely surprised by this, and the fact that the editors at this mag thought this would be okay. Nas can't call his album "Ni**er," because it would "be over too many people's heads," but this sh*t is okay??? ignorance too blatant for words. (long-ass muhf*cking) *SIGH*...

my top 5 angering things are the same as goc's.

stay up Jay,
C